Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) Status in FCR-Treated CLL Patients at the End of Treatment Influences Progression Free Survival (PFS), Results of the Ctrial-IE (ICORG) 07-01/ CLL Ireland Study, with Mutational Analysis Providing Additional Insight

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 3237-3237
Author(s):  
Niamh Appleby ◽  
Fiona M Quinn ◽  
David O'Brien ◽  
Smyth Liam ◽  
Johanna Kelly ◽  
...  

Abstract Fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab (FCR) therapy results in a complete remission (CR) rate of 72% and a median progression free survival (PFS) of 80 months in non-del (17P) CLL1. Achieving an MRD negative (MRD-ve) CR after completing therapy is an early surrogate marker for overall survival (OS) and PFS2. Specific genetic CLL subtypes determined by fluorescent in-situ hybridisation (FISH) analysis, immunoglobulin mutation IgVH, NOTCH1 and SF3B1 status determine response to chemotherapy3,4. We completed a multi-centre prospective study between 2008 and 2012, with a median follow up of 62.6 months using MRD status to determine length of therapy. Patients who achieved an MRD-veCR after 4 courses of FCR received no further therapy and the remaining patients completed 6 cycles of FCR. MRD status was tracked 6 monthly in patients who became MRD-veuntil MRD was detected. The genetic subtype was also analysed but did not influence treatment. Fifty-two patients {35M;17F, median age 61years (range 37-73)} were enrolled. Forty-six patients completed the MRD assessment after 4 cycles. Eleven patients discontinued assigned FCR therapy for the following reasons: prolonged cytopenia (4); non-compliance (1); autoimmune haemolytic anaemia (2); renal impairment (1); pleural effusion (1); not recorded (2). Eighteen (34.6%) patients achieved an MRD-veCR after 4 cycles and a further11 after 6cycles resulting in 29/52 (55.8%) MRD-veCRs in total. The median PFS was 72.3 months (95% Confidence Interval 61.3-84.1 months) and the median OS has not been reached. Patients who attained an MRD-veversusMRD+vestatus had a prolonged PFS (81.1 vs 46.2 months, p<0.0002). No difference in PFS was observed between patients reaching an MRD-veCR after 4 versus 6 cycles (median PFS81.1 vs 84.1 months,p=0.29). FISH results were available for 48 patients; del(13q) in 16/48 (33%), del(11q) in 15/48 (31%) no abnormality in 12/48 (25%), trisomy 12 in 4 (8%) and other abnormality in 1 patient. The IgVH status was unfavourable in 34/52 (65%), SF3B1 mutations were detected in 5/51 (9.8%) and NOTCH1 mutations in 10/52(19.2%) patients respectively, comparable to published studies of first-line treatment in CLL3,4. The median PFS for patients with good risk IgVH was not reached. Del(11q) did not impact on PFS (median PFS 66.5 vs 78.9 months, p=0.7301). SF3B1 and NOTCH1 mutated patients had a shortened PFS (median PFS 38.4 vs 71.1 months, p=0.038 and median PFS 62.4 vs 82.2 months p=0.0302, respectively). In conclusion abbreviated FCR therapy is effective for patients achieving MRD-veremission after 4 cycles. SF3B1 and NOTCH1 mutated patients had a short PFS and may benefit from alternative first-line treatment. This finding emphasizes the role mutational profiling will play in optimising and personalising therapy in CLL in the future. Reference: Tam C, O'Brien S, WierdaW, et al. “Long-term results of the fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab regimen as initial therapy of chronic lymphocytic leukemia” Blood 2008 Aug 15;112(4):975-80 Böttcher S, Ritgen M, Fischer K, et al. "Minimal Residual Disease Quantification is an Independent Predictor of Progression-Free and Overall Survival in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: A Multivariate Analysis From the Randomized GCLLSG CLL8 Trial" J Clin Onc 2012 Mar 20; 30(9):980-8. StilgenbauerS,SchnaiterA,PaschkaP, et al. "Gene mutations and treatment outcome in chronic lymphocyticleukemia: results from the CLL8 trial" Blood 2014 May 22;123(21):3247-54 Chiaretti S, Marinelli M, Del Giudice I, et al."NOTCH1, SF3B1, BIRC3 and TP53 mutations in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia undergoing first-line treatment: correlation with biological parameters and response to treatment"LeukLymphoma 2014 Dec; 55(12):2785-92 Figure 1 Patient outcomes by MRD status in ICORG 07-01 Trial Figure 1. Patient outcomes by MRD status in ICORG 07-01 Trial Figure 2 Figure 2. Figure 3 Figure 3. Disclosures Crotty: BMS, Takeda, Novartis, Janssen, Roche: Honoraria. O'Dwyer:Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (35) ◽  
pp. 5616-5623 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Hillmen ◽  
Aleksander B. Skotnicki ◽  
Tadeusz Robak ◽  
Branimir Jaksic ◽  
Anna Dmoszynska ◽  
...  

Purpose We conducted a randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous alemtuzumab compared with chlorambucil in first-line treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Patients and Methods Patients received alemtuzumab (30 mg three times per week, for up to 12 weeks) or chlorambucil (40 mg/m2 every 28 days, for up to 12 months). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), complete response (CR), time to alternative therapy, safety, and overall survival. Results We randomly assigned 297 patients, 149 to alemtuzumab and 148 to chlorambucil. Alemtuzumab had superior PFS, with a 42% reduction in risk of progression or death (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.58; P = .0001), and a median time to alternative treatment of 23.3 versus 14.7 months for chlorambucil (HR = 0.54; P = .0001). The ORR was 83% with alemtuzumab (24% CR) versus 55% with chlorambucil (2% CR); differences in ORR and CR were highly statistically significant (P < .0001). Elimination of minimal residual disease occurred in 11 of 36 complete responders to alemtuzumab versus none to chlorambucil. Adverse events profiles were similar, except for more infusion-related and cytomegalovirus (CMV) events with alemtuzumab and more nausea and vomiting with chlorambucil. CMV events had no apparent impact on efficacy. Conclusion As first-line treatment for patients with CLL, alemtuzumab demonstrated significantly improved PFS, time to alternative treatment, ORR and CR, and minimal residual disease–negative remissions compared with chlorambucil, with predictable and manageable toxicity.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 2744-2744 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajay K Gopal ◽  
Brad S Kahl ◽  
Christopher Flowers ◽  
Peter Martin ◽  
Brian K Link ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the most common indolent NHL with a heterogenous natural history of disease and a median survival of 8 to 12 y, albeit ranging between 1 to 20 y. Casulo et al. (2015) identified a high-risk FL cohort of patients with progression of disease (POD) at ≤24 months following initiation of immunochemotherapy with R-CHOP. Idelalisib (Zydelig) is a first-in-class, highly selective, oral inhibitor of PI3Kd which is indicated for relapsed FL or SLL following receipt of at least two lines of systemic chemotherapy. Retrospective subgroup analysis of the idelalisib registrational trial NCT01282424 (101-09) of a cohort with early POD following immunochemotherapy was performed to assess possible activity of idelalisib in this population. Methods: A subset of 46 patients enrolled in study 101-09 were identified as having been diagnosed with FL and having received first-line immunochemotherapy, of which 37 experienced early POD, defined as starting second-line treatment within 24 months of initial first-line treatment. For the latter group, descriptive statistics of demographic and baseline characteristics and inter-treatment intervals in months as well as Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) following initiation of immunochemotherapy and idelalisib were calculated. Population: Demographic characteristics of these 37 patients included median (range) age at initiation of idelalisib of 64 (33-84) y and 18 (48.6%) females. Histologic grade at diagnosis included 33 (89.2%) with grades 1 or 2 as well as 4 (10.8%) with grade 3A, while 21 (56.8%) patients had a FLIPI score ≥3. The mean (s.d.) number of prior therapies was 3.4±1.4, with a range of 2 to 8, while first-line therapies included 21 (56.8%) patients who received R-CHOP-based regimens, 7 (18.9%) who received BR, and 5 (13.5%) who received R-CVP. Mean (s.d.) inter-treatment intervals included 12.5±6.1 months between first- and second-line for all patients, 9.7±9.3 months between second- and third-line for all patients, 11.9±12.0 months between third- and fourth-line for 24 (64.9%) patients, and 11.8±7.6 months between fourth- and fifth-line for 15 (40.5%) patients. Median (range) time from first-line therapy to idelalisib initiation was 30.3 (8.9-94.7) months; no patient received idelalisib as second-line therapy. Results: Best responses included 5 (13.5%) patients with CR, 16 (43.2%) with PR, 2 (5.4%) with SD, and 1 (2.7%) with PD; median duration of response for those with CR or PR was 11.8 months (95% CI: 3.8 months, not evaluable). There were 7 (18.9%) deaths and 21 (56.8%) PFS events in this group. Estimated probabilities of survival (s.e.) and progression-free status at 2 y following initiation of idelalisib were 79%±7% and 29%±10%, respectively. Median PFS was 11.1 months (95% CI: 5.5, 19.3 months). Estimated probability of survival (s.e.) at 5 years following initiation of first-line treatment was 79%±8%. Median overall survival from both initiation of first-line immunochemotherapy as well as with idelalisib was not reached during the course of this study. Conclusions: Idelalisib may have significant clinical activity in high-risk and doubly-refractive FL following early relapse status post first-line immunochemotherapy. Given the small size of the studied subset population which may not be representative, further characterization in additional patients is warranted to ensure the generalizability of this finding, including consideration of further investigational protocols featuring targeted therapies employed both as single agents and in combination. Figure 1. Overall Survival From Initiation of First-line Treatment Figure 1. Overall Survival From Initiation of First-line Treatment Figure 2. Overall Survival From Initiation of Idelalisib Figure 2. Overall Survival From Initiation of Idelalisib Figure 3. Progression-Free Survival From Initiation of Idelalisib Figure 3. Progression-Free Survival From Initiation of Idelalisib Disclosures Gopal: Gilead, Spectrum, Pfizer, Janssen, Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Spectrum, Pfizer, BioMarin, Cephalon/Teva, Emergent/Abbott. Gilead, Janssen., Merck, Milennium, Piramal, Seattle Genetics, Giogen Idec, BMS: Research Funding; Millennium, Seattle Genetics, Sanofi-Aventis: Honoraria. Kahl:Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy; Cell Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Infinity: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy. Flowers:Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Spectrum: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celegene: Other: Unpaid consultant, Research Funding; OptumRx: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Martin:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acerta: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy. Link:Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding. Ye:Gilead: Employment. Koh:Gilead: Employment. Abella:Gilead: Employment. Barr:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Salles:Calistoga Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Celgene Corporation; Genentech, Inc.; Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P.; Roche: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation; Roche and Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation; Roche: Speakers Bureau.


Endocrine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simone De Leo ◽  
Marta Di Stefano ◽  
Luca Persani ◽  
Laura Fugazzola ◽  
Carla Colombo

BMC Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuejun He ◽  
Jijun You ◽  
Haibing Ding ◽  
Zhisheng Zhang ◽  
Lin Cui ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Vascular mimicry (VM) was associated with the prognosis of cancers. The aim of the study was to explore the association between VM and anticancer therapy response in patients with lung adenocarcinoma. Methods This was a single-center retrospective study of patients with lung adenocarcinoma between March 1st, 2013, to April 1st, 2019, at the Second People’s Hospital of Taizhou City. All included patients were divided into the VM and no-VM groups according to whether VM was observed or not in the specimen. Vessels with positive PAS and negative CD34 staining were confirmed as VM. The main outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). Results Sixty-six (50.4%) patients were male. Eighty-one patients received chemotherapy as the first-line treatment, and 50 patients received TKIs. Forty-five (34.4%) patients were confirmed with VM. There was no difference regarding the first-line treatment between the VM and no-VM groups (P = 0.285). The 86 patients without VM had a median PFS of 279 (range, 90–1095) days, and 45 patients with VM had a median PFS of 167 (range, 90–369) days (P < 0.001). T stage (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.10–1.71), N stage (HR = 1.43, 95%CI: 1.09–1.86), M stage (HR = 2.85, 95%CI: 1.76–4.61), differentiation (HR = 1.85, 95%CI: 1.29–2.65), therapy (HR = 0.32, 95%CI: 0.21–0.49), VM (HR = 2.12, 95%CI: 1.33–3.37), and ECOG (HR = 1.41, 95%CI: 1.09–1.84) were independently associated with PFS. Conclusion The benefits of first-line TKIs for NSCLC with EGFR mutation are possibly better than those of platinum-based regimens in patients without VM, but there is no difference in the benefit of chemotherapy or target therapy for VM-positive NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 5571-5571
Author(s):  
Jesus D Gonzalez-Lugo ◽  
Ana Acuna-Villaorduna ◽  
Joshua Heisler ◽  
Niyati Goradia ◽  
Daniel Cole ◽  
...  

Introduction: Multiple Myeloma (MM) is a disease of the elderly; with approximately two-thirds of cases diagnosed at ages older than 65 years. However, this population has been underrepresented in clinical trials. Hence, there are no evidence-based guidelines to select the most appropriate treatment that would balance effectiveness against risk for side effects in the real world. Currently, guidelines advise that doublet regimens should be considered for frail, elderly patients; but more detailed recommendations are lacking. This study aims to describe treatment patterns in older patients with MM and compare treatment response and side effects between doublet and triplet regimens. Methods: Patients diagnosed with MM at 70 years or older and treated at Montefiore Medical Center between 2000 and 2017 were identified using Clinical Looking Glass, an institutional software tool. Recipients of autologous stem cell transplant were excluded. We collected demographic data and calculated comorbidity burden based on the age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Laboratory parameters included cell blood counts, renal function, serum-protein electrophoresis and free kappa/lambda ratio pre and post first-line treatment. Treatment was categorized into doublet [bortezomib/dexamethasone (VD) and lenalidomide/dexamethasone (RD)] or triplet regimens [lenalidomide/bortezomib/dexamethasone (RVD) and cyclophosphamide/bortezomib/dexamethasone (CyborD)]. Disease response was reported as VGPR, PR, SD or PD using pre-established criteria. Side effects included cytopenias, diarrhea, thrombosis and peripheral neuropathy. Clinical and laboratory data were obtained by manual chart review. Event-free survival was defined as time to treatment change, death or disease progression. Data were analyzed by treatment group using Stata 14.1 Results: A total of 97 patients were included, of whom 46 (47.4%) were males, 47 (48.5%) were Non-Hispanic Black and 23 (23.7%) were Hispanic. Median age at diagnosis was 77 years (range: 70-90). Median baseline hemoglobin was 9.4 (8.5-10.5) and 14 (16.1%) had grade 3/4 anemia. Baseline thrombocytopenia and neutropenia of any grade were less common (18.4% and 17.7%, respectively) and 11 patients (20%) had GFR ≤30. Treatment regimens included VD (51, 52.6%), CyborD (18, 18.6%), RD (15, 15.5%) and RVD (13, 13.4%). Overall, doublets were more commonly used than triplets (66, 68% vs 31, 32%). Baseline characteristics were similar among treatment regimen groups. There was no difference in treatment selection among patients with baseline anemia or baseline neutropenia; however, doublets were preferred for those with underlying thrombocytopenia compared to triplets (93.8% vs 6.2%, p<0.01). Median first-line treatment duration was 4.1 months and did not differ among treatment groups (3.9 vs. 4.3 months; p=0.88 for doublets and triplets, respectively). At least a partial response was achieved in 47 cases (63.5%) and it did not differ between doublets and triplets (61.7% vs 66.7%). In general, first line treatment was changed in 50 (51.5%) patients and the change frequency was higher for triplets than doublets (71% vs 42.4%, p<0.01). Among patients that changed treatment, 17(34.7%) switched from a doublet to a triplet; 15 (30.6%) from a triplet to a doublet and 17 (34.7%) changed the regimen remaining as doublet or triplet, respectively. There was no difference in frequency of cytopenias, diarrhea, thrombosis or peripheral neuropathy among groups. Median event-free survival was longer in patients receiving doublet vs. triplet therapy, although the difference was not statistically significant (7.3 vs 4.3 months; p=0.06). Conclusions: We show a real-world experience of an inner city, elderly MM cohort, ineligible for autologous transplantation. A doublet combination and specifically the VD regimen was the treatment of choice in the majority of cases. In this cohort, triplet regimens did not show better response rates and led to treatment change more often than doublets. Among patients requiring treatment, approximately a third switched from doublet to triplet or viceversa which suggest that current evaluation of patient frailty at diagnosis is suboptimal. Despite similar frequency of side effects among groups, there was a trend towards longer event-free survival in patients receiving doublets. Larger retrospective studies are needed to confirm these results. Disclosures Verma: Janssen: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Stelexis: Equity Ownership, Honoraria; Acceleron: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document